Qemal Disha testifies that he had opposed Hajdin Sejdia’s fiscal scams and that the ministers, with Nano at the head, were acting as if the Council of Ministers’ decision they were presenting was valid, when in fact it was a decision by Hajdin Sejdia to whom they kept referring for taxes [?] The witness from Lluarasi states that Nano and Çani had pushed him chiefly away from the tobacco issue. Çaçaj confirms that he had no knowledge whatsoever and had never been informed by Nano - etc. About the case and that he has no knowledge of the case of 14.2.1991, regarding which Nano wanted the committee to designate Levante Co for the distribution of tobacco. FORMER PRIME MINISTER ÇAÇANI STATES THAT MALIQI - NANO AND COMPANY HAD PUSHED HIM CHIEFLY AWAY FROM THE TOBACCO ISSUE. ÇAÇAJ CONFIRMS THAT HE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE CASE OF 14.2.1991, REGARDING WHICH NANO WANTED THE COMMITTEE TO DESIGNATE LEVANTE CO FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF TOBACCO. QEMAL DISHA TESTIFIES THAT HE HAD OPPOSED HAJDIN SEJDIA’S FISCAL SCAMS AND THAT THE GROUP OF MINISTERS, WITH NANO AT THE HEAD, WERE ACTING AS IF THEY WERE PRESENTING AS A COUNCIL OF MINISTERS DECISION THE DECISION THAT NANO HAD MADE, BY PRESENTING AS A COUNCIL OF MINISTERS DECISION NO. 121, DATED 28.3.1991, THROUGH WHICH SEJDIA WAS PRESENTED AS A COUNCIL OF MINISTERS DECISION, WHEN THIS DECISION WAS ONLY NANO’S AND HIS CIRCLE’S, AND NOT THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS’. THE WITNESS LLUARASI STATES THAT NANO AND ÇANI HAD PUSHED DISHA ASIDE OVER THE OBSTACLES THAT, in the end, HE WAS RAISING FOR HAJDIN SEJDIA OVER TAXES [?] OTHER FRAUDS BY NANO COME TO LIGHT. ON 25-27 APRIL 1991, NANO SENDS ALEKS LLUARASI TO ITALY AT THE HEAD OF A GOVERNMENT DELEGATION, BUT HE HAD BEEN AUTHORIZED BY THE PRIME MINISTER TO DEAL WITH THE REFUGEE ISSUE AND NOT WITH TOBACCO. AFTER THE QUESTIONING OF THE 51ST WITNESS, AFTER THEY SAW THAT THEIR CASE WAS DEFINITIVELY BURIED UNDER THE LIGHT OF THE TRUTH, IN A MOST EXTRAORDINARY WAY, NANO’S LAWYERS, DEFEATED BY THEIR CLIENT, ASK FOR THE QUESTIONS TO START AGAIN FROM THE BEGINNING

The witness-questioning phase has ended In the courtroom there was a heated debate about the former prime minister’s conduct. There was talk of a document forger, misuse of funds, and interference with investigations. At the forger, prosecuted criminally - 3 witnesses confirm the same thing: Nano did not heed objections - The agent of a state security man, Nikolla, with his letter setting out the relevant reasons - Miranda arrested for [?], worker Maliqi - He has the whole court, Plaka has fallen, he defends Nano! At the end of this “sui generis” hearing, which is taking place in the Tirana court and in which at times even the lawyers themselves are arguing, the questioning of the last witnesses began yesterday. First, witness Xhemal Disha was questioned, who said that he had reported unlawful acts against the government and the tobacco industry. According to him, Hajdin Sejdia had benefited unfairly and there had been pressure against him. Also yesterday, former prime minister Adil Çaçani was questioned in the courtroom. On that same day he declared that in no case had he been aware of the matter of 14.2.1991 and that the delegation sent to Italy had a completely different authorization. According to him, Aleks Lluarasi’s mission had nothing to do with tobacco, but with the refugee issue. According to the other witness, Aleks Lluarasi, he had been assigned by the government to negotiations in Italy only on the refugee issue and not on anything related to tobacco imports. This, according to his testimony, disproves Nano’s lawyers’ claims. It was further emphasized that Decision No. 121, dated 28.3.1991, had been presented as a decision of the Council of Ministers, whereas in reality it was only a decision by Nano and a narrow circle around him. At the close of the hearing, after the questioning of the 51st witness, Nano’s lawyers requested that the questioning start again from the beginning. Photo A. Ismaili

Asçani: Well, as I asked in the ministry, I asked in the prime minister’s office, and I do not believe that for a minister it matters whether you ask in the ministry or at the prime minister’s office! Pylli Av. Alisot: What did Asçani tell you? Do you know him here in court? Asçani: He told me, I will ask him. Pylli Av. Alisot: Has Prime Minister Berberi ever known of the import of any quantity of cigarettes? Asçani: No. Pylli Av. Alisot: What did Asçani tell you? Asçani: He said that he had some contact with the person in question. Pylli Av. Alisot: Have you ever heard about the export of cigarettes “[...]”? Asçani: No. Pylli Av. Alisot: Have you ever asked Avdyl? Asçani: No. I have never seen him. Pylli Av. Alisot: Why? Asçani: Perhaps he did not present the issue in writing. Pylli Av. Gjeta: If in decision no. 121 it is written that action is being taken according to the decision of the Council of Ministers, then in the agreement you signed in Rome, does it not say there that action was being taken in implementation of decision no. 121 of the Council of Ministers? Asçani: I do not know what is written in the agreement, but if that is the case, it was surely done by others. Pylli Av. Gjeta: Are you not referring to that decision when you received the authorization? Asçani: The authorization was given to me by the prime minister for the refugee issue and not for tobacco. (continued on page 4)

- An agent of a state security officer, Nikolla, with his letter stating the relevant reasons - Miranda arrested for [?], worker Maliqi - He has fallen to the court, he has fallen to Plaka, he defends Nano! By A. Ismaili However, by the end of [b?], it could be seen that this case, with the hearing of some of the last witnesses, would be closed, but yesterday showed even more clearly that the group of lawyers had not given up its efforts to turn the hearing into yet another debate. Thus, when questioned by the lawyers and by the prosecution, the witnesses brought forward versions that in many cases contradicted the defense’s claims. At the center of the discussion stood the tobacco issue, Decision No. 121, and Nano’s role in this process. In what followed, the questions and answers reaffirmed that Qemal Disha had objected to the procedures, that Adil Çaçani had no knowledge of the case of 14 February 1991, and that the delegation to Italy had an entirely different mandate. (continued on page 7)

Witness Adil Disha: At first it struck me that the price on the reference list was low and that cigarette imports differed greatly from market prices. I had informed the prime minister, but I received no answer. Pylli Av. Haxhiaj: Were you aware of what happened with decision no. 121? Q. Disha: No, I was not aware. Pylli Av. Haxhiaj: Who asked you to prepare a report? Q. Disha: As far as I remember, representatives of the ministry. Pylli Av. Haxhiaj: What amounts of money were at stake? Q. Disha: It was about 10 million dollars. Pylli Av. Haxhiaj: Did you notify the competent authorities? Q. Disha: Yes, I did notify them and then I was dismissed. Pylli Av. Vokshi: What did Prime Minister Nano tell you? Q. Disha: He told me that he would look into the matter. Pylli Av. Vokshi: Did you have another meeting afterward? Q. Disha: No. (continued on page 4)